Talk:Labour Party (Norway)

Party positions?

The Socialist Left Party (Norway) page has a pretty good descriptions of that party's positions on numerous issues. But such a section is missing from a lot of the other pages about Norwegian Political Parties. Can someone with a good deal of knowledge about these parties update this page to include the Labour Party's general position on various issues? Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.33.1.37 (talk) 15:34, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

UK labour party

can someone please compare the norwegian labour party to the uk labour party. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.70.181.1 (talk) 13:58, November 3, 2006 (UTC)

The Norwegian party is more left wing in politics than the UK party, which has gone strongly to the right since the 80s. However, like the British party, also the Norwegian party is more liberal in its economics than it was in the past. --Oddeivind 19:37, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

The Norwegian party is now much more right wing than the British Labour Party, since the latter under Corbyn has become essentially a socialist party.203.80.61.102 (talk) 04:22, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

I think the previous two comments are both wrong and right in their analysis of the Norwegian Labour Party. The Norwegian Labour Partys policies as per the published political manifest for 2021 is solidly founded in the European Social Democratic tradition, pretty close to the UK Labour Party policies over time, but a lot more conservative when compared to the policies of Jeremy Corbyns UK Labour from a few years back. With a long history of multi-party parliamentary democracy, a tradition of broad agreements and settlements between the governing and opposing parties when dealing with big issues, like defense, pensions, etc., has been established with most participating parties, avoiding jojo-changes of policies between shifting administration. This type of broad agreements between parties in government and opposition is somewhat uncommon in other parliamentary democracies, both in Europe in elsewhere. Over time this has provided as very stable form of government. Although a Conservative coalition governed Norway from 2013 to 2021, setting its imprint on many areas like taxes and regulations, a lot of key issues, with long term perspectives, had already been agreed upon with the former administration, and the one before. While administrations have changes since 1945, even with a period of the Labour Party having a simple majority in parliament by itself, the Labour and Conservative parties have always had a majority between them, so many questions like defense, foreign policies have been settled between those two, in practice, ruling parties. Calmaris 05:32, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Moved back?

Why was this article moved back to "Norwegian Labour Party"? After the party formally changed its name some days ago, the party name is now simply "Arbeiderpartiet" (not "Det norske arbeiderparti" as before), which according to Wikipedia policy means that the article should now be titled "Labour Party (Norway)". If no good reasons are given to keep the old name, I will soon request the article to be moved to "Labour Party (Norway)" again. – Bellatores (t.) 17:06, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

I see no reason why it should be located at 'Norwegian Labour Party' any more. The move revert was done by a very infrequent editor. I asked for a reason from him on his user page, but no reply has been given. Arsenikk ^(talk) 17:55, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Easter rebellion of the Labour Party; redirect

Can someone create a redirect for the

Easter rebellion of the Labour Party. [1] is the link to the Norwegian article.

It is also mentioned in this [2] version of our article on Workers' Youth League. --No parking here (talk) 15:40, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

The reference to the "easter rebellion" is meaningless. A couple of young socialists "contacted MPs of the labour party, to have MPs sign a petition". How is that a rebellion? There should either be much more detail, or the entire reference to the "rebellion" deleted203.80.61.102 (talk) 04:21, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. WP:UCN trumps WP:OR. Favonian (talk) 20:23, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

---

Labour Party (Norway) → Workers' Party (Norway)– "Arbeider" means "worker". "Workers' party" is a more correct translation, as "Labour Party" would translate to "Arbeidspartiet" (lit: "Party of the labour" LiquidWater 20:14, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose. Please stop this now, by WP:SNOW. Labour Party (Norway) is what has been used in all official info for years, see eg this, from the official Norwegian government site. Changing the English name is a clear violation of WP:OR. Cheers, Huldra (talk) 20:20, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

WP:Snow? How can you say that after only you having commented? LiquidWater 20:28, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

"Workers' Party" is an accurate translation of "Arbeiderpartiet". "Arbeider" in Norwegian can be translated to "Worker", whereas "Labour" means "Arbeid", or "Work", in Norwegian. "Labour party" would then literally mean in Norwegian "Party of Labour".

Most other foreign parties that have had their names translated as "Labour Party" have a name that can be directly translated into labour, like:

• Angolan Labour Party (MPLA), "Partido do Trabalho" - "Party of Labour".
• Belarusian Labour Party, "Беларуская партыя працы Biełaruskaja Partyja Pracy" - "Belarusian Party of Labour".
• Most Francophone countries, "Parti du Travail" - "Party of Labour".
• The Swedish Social Democratic Workers' Party is called "arbetareparti" in Swedish, which means the exact same as in Norwegian.. LiquidWater 20:30, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose. Whether Labour Party or the Workers' Party is the more correct translation isn't really the point. Wikipedia is edited based on reliable sources; this also goes for translations. Wikipedia will use the most common translation, which clearly is Labour Party (I could give lots of examples). It is also the translation the party itself uses. Regards, Iselilja (talk) 20:31, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

How can "Arbeidernes Ungdomsfylking" (AUF) be translated into "Workers' Youth League", while "Arbeiderpartiet" can be translated into "Labour Party"? This doesn't make sense and is confusing for some readers. LiquidWater 20:34, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose Usage in English takes priority over literal translations. I presume "Labour Pary" is used because "Workers Party" has particular connotations in English that don't fit this party's position on the spectrum. Timrollpickering (talk) 21:38, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose this is a social-democratic party, therefore the translation is "labour party", if it were a communist party then the translation would be "workers' party", so the translation is correct, since mechanical translation is not actual translation, translation takes into account the differences in usage of terms and grammar in different languages. -- 70.24.250.103 (talk) 22:44, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Comment The above IP and Timrollpickering (talk) are both perfectly correct. A request to move the name to "workers' party" has strong political overtones, IMO. Cheers, Huldra (talk) 19:23, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose for the same reason as Huldra and others. The Norwegian Labour Party are Social democrats and thus much closer to the center of the political spectrum than to the left, while the name "Worker's Party" in English implies a party at the far left of the scale. And this is after all the English language edition of Wikipedia. Thomas.W (talk) 15:52, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose, the current title is by far the most common name for the party in English, including official documents, and it is even a perfectly good translation. The proposed translation "Worker's Party" translated back to Norwegian would be "Arbeidernes parti", and is no improvement. Both Høyre ("Conservative Party") and Venstre ("Liberal Party") have less literal translations, so I have no idea why the nom wanted to start his crusade for literal translations here. Sjakkalle (Check!) 16:52, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose - the most prevalent name appears to be "Labour", used even on the party website, although they do not appear to have many documents in English; election material, party secretary general's CV, post 2011 attacks message, [a speech to the OSCE assembly]. Green Giant (talk) 17:57, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose - the current article title is the most common name used in English sources. Whether it is a "correct" translation is not up to Wikipedia editors to decide, we simply do what reliable sources do. Mentoz86 (talk) 13:05, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Labour Party (Norway). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101230014048/http://www.aftenposten.no/fakta/innsikt/article2852464.ece to http://www.aftenposten.no/fakta/innsikt/article2852464.ece
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110924171401/http://www.regjeringen.no/krd/html/valg2011/bf5.html to http://www.regjeringen.no/krd/html/valg2011/bf5.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150418145701/http://arbeiderpartiet.no/Om-AP/Information-in-English/The-Labour-Party-Information-in-English to http://arbeiderpartiet.no/Om-AP/Information-in-English/The-Labour-Party-Information-in-English

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:33, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Labour Party (Norway). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121206091007/http://arbeiderpartiet.no/Aktuelt/Nyhetsarkiv/Partiet/Historisk-oekning-i-medlemstallet to http://arbeiderpartiet.no/Aktuelt/Nyhetsarkiv/Partiet/Historisk-oekning-i-medlemstallet

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:58, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Labour Party (Norway). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110117035507/http://arbeiderpartiet.no/Om-AP/Aps-historie/Hva-historien-forteller/1920-1935 to http://arbeiderpartiet.no/Om-AP/Aps-historie/Hva-historien-forteller/1920-1935

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:15, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

"Alle skal med" = "Everyone is coming along"?

Presently the motto "Alle skal med" is translated with "Everyone is coming along", is that an official translation?

To my ears it sounds wrong. "Everyone should be included" sounds like a more correct translation to me. Comments? Huldra (talk) 23:46, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

It cannot be translated into English as it is ambiguous. Narssarssuaq (talk) 16:50, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Left-wing or centre-left?

In the Norwegian language, Arbeiderpartiet is called left-wing, not centre-left, ref. e.g. the Stortinget citation. The party can probably not be directly compared to the British Labour party as it has close semi-formal ties to the Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions. Narssarssuaq (talk) 16:50, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

If you are norwegian like me, you will notice that the articles only mentions left, centre and right, whereas it ignores the very idea that some parties may be centre-left (AP), some may be centre-right (KRF) and that some political parties throughout the world dont even have a single position. Furthermore, the UK Labour Party has got formal ties to several unions and organizations, see List of organisations associated with the British Labour Party, and also i was referring to the blairite period which included a lot of privatization, the Norwegian Labour Party has nowadays got many similar policies according to one of the lead paragraphs on this page, which in practice puts them closer to the centre. And traditionally, social democratic parties are put at the centre-left position, something you might notice on many other wikipedia-pages related to SocDem parties! The fact remains that there is nothing uniquely left-wing about this party. Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 20:32, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

The party does not, however, identify as a centre-left party: Do you agree that they might identify as (hard) left-wing, but that they would (vehemently) deny that they are (hard) centrist? "Centre-left" would thus be a misnomer. Please provide a stronger citation than the Stortinget reference to support your view. As stated earlier, SocDem in Norway is more closely tied to labour unions than in other countries, which might explain this alleged orientation. Whether or not they "in reality are" centre-left would tend towards original research. Narssarssuaq (talk) 21:12, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Hard left would imply that they are radical, which they are not as that would rather be the Red Party (Far-left). I should also point out that any link to a labour union does not affect their position as the union has it's own leadership and does not always agree with the party. Also, labour unions are not something that exclusively excists on the left. The fact also remains that the Storting-source generalizes political positions and it might be necessary to find other reliable sources to strengthen a claim that would put the Labour party in the same boat as SV and the Red Party, both of whom are theoretically radically different to the Labour party. Should also point out that for such a big party, backing up ideology or position with a single source might not be enough. It remains a fact that no socialist or communist would but a party like Labour in the same category as themselves, the policies described in this article are too radically different from those of other left-wing parties in Norway. Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 23:11, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

En.wiki is a worldwide wiki. I'd rather we use descriptions that make sense in the global and European context. Norway's Labour Party is a fairly typical Nordic social-democratic party, and attached to the wider European and global social-democratic family, so the article should reflect that.--Autospark (talk) 14:56, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Arbeiderpartiet does not have the same history as e.g. PD in Italy, which is literally a fusion of the centre and the left wing. Ap identify as left-wing, not as centre-left. Narssarssuaq (talk) 19:55, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Well to be fair, no party in Norway uses terms like centre-left or centre-right, in fact they rarely even use terms like far-left/right. The fact remains that on one hand, their official social-democratic ideology put them at centre-left, whereas in practice they follow more of a third-way policy and as such is in practice closer to the centre of politics. Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 21:54, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

It's not a regular European social democratic party due to its official ties to the Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions. On the Norwegian left-right axis they are considered left-wing more or less by definition, with SV being hard-left or far-left and Sp centre or centre-left. The "third way" was a centrist wave 20-25 years ago and does not seem all that relevant today. Narssarssuaq (talk) 16:42, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Lead section rewrite tag

The lead section has long paragraphs and a jumbled chonology, which makes it quite confusing. Mottezen (talk) 18:40, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

good ("good enough")?

• "by a bomb towards a government building (which was led by the Labour Party)". 89.8.175.76 (talk) 04:04, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Position

The Norwegian Labor Party is not centre-left. They are similar now to the party Right (Høyre). Labor is purple, centre-right / right. Like in the UK. Can someone with the opportunity please update? Minurt (talk) 11:20, 19 June 2024 (UTC)